3 ms·
It's possible, but extremely unlikely due to the game theory of Plurality Voting or IRV (in countries/regions which have switched to that) both of which are bad
by harshreality 13y ago
It's possible, but extremely unlikely due to the game theory of Plurality Voting or IRV (in countries/regions which have switched to that) both of which are bad, yet overwhelmingly used for single-winner elections (like, for selecting a president, or in some countries for selecting a single representative per voting district).
http://rangevoting.org/Duverger.html http://rangevoting.org/Duverger.html
There's a political science term called a realigning election, but it involves a radical change to a party, or the displacement of at least one of the two dominant parties with a new party, after which elections go back to a two-party-dominated playing field for a while; a persistent 3-or-more party system is not viable without changing voting systems.
- specialist 13y ago"IRV which are bad" Did you mean first past the post (FPTP) aka winner takes all? In election reform circles, IRV refers to instant runoff voting.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- nitrogen 13y agoPV is the same as FPTP. IRV is very nearly as bad, and perhaps worse due to monotonicity. See http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/ http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
- ajslater 13y agoAnd like rangevoting.org mentions, Range Voting technically may give you the least regretful results, but its a great deal more complicated than Approval Voting, which is dead simple and nearly as good. http://rangevoting.org/Approval.html http://rangevoting.org/Approval.html http://www.electology.org/approval-voting http://www.electology.org/approval-voting